Phil, Thanks for the advice.
*Skeeve Stevens, CEO* eintellego Pty Ltd [email protected] ; www.eintellego.net <http://www.eintellego.net.au> Phone: 1300 753 383 ; Fax: (+612) 8572 9954 Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellego twitter.com/networkceoau ; www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve PO Box 7726, Baulkham Hills, NSW 1755 Australia The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco – IBM On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 21:56, Phil Shafer <[email protected]> wrote: > Skeeve Stevens writes: > >We've considered having a single process using edit exclusive, but this is > >going to slow things down significantly. > > Commits are serialized, so they are effectively a single process > on the box. Using "edit private" will likely decrease performance, > since internally it's doing diff/patch processing at commit time. > > I would use the <lock-configuration> RPC ("configure exclusive") > and consider pushing all changes via a single external process > that can "batch" them together, if you can trust the patches. > > Also I always suggest putting application-based configuration into > a configuration group so that (a) it's easy to see what's application > provided and what's hand configured, (b) it's easy to "load replace" > that config group with new application data, and (c) the human user > can override the application using the foreground config. It's > also easy to test application by turning off the "apply-groups" for > that app's config group. Not required, but something that has > worked well for me. > > Thanks, > Phil > _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
